Preparation and properties of epoxy nanocomposites. I. The effect of premixing on dispersion of organoclay
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this work was to systematically study the effect of the conditions of shear and temperature used to premix nanoclay with epoxy resin on the dispersion and intercalation/exfoliation of the nanoclay in the resulting epoxy nanocomposites. The different mixing approaches used were hand stirring, conventional mechanical stirring, a high‐speed homogenizer, and a microfluidizer. The quality of dispersion and intercalation/exfoliation of the organoclay in the epoxy resin was analyzed after premixing (before adding hardener) by means of X‐ray diffraction (XRD) and rheological measurements. Nanocomposites obtained after adding hardener and curing were characterized by means of XRD, field emission gun scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, and image analysis. Both the premixing and curing steps were found to play a determining role in the dispersion and intercalation/exfoliation of organoclay. Increased intercalation and exfoliation can take place during curing, with the extent depending on the curing rate. Although full exfoliation of clay cannot be achieved at the premixing stage, this step appears to be very important in controlling the micro‐dispersion and thus affecting the further intercalation and exfoliation that take place during the curing step. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2009. © 2009 Society of Plastics Engineers
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it